Video: Chicago makes sex-ed mandatory for kindergarteners

posted at 2:51 pm on August 30, 2013 by Ed Morrissey

Has Chicago solved all of its other educational issues? We’ll get back to that in a moment, but that must be what the Chicago Public School District believes. Starting this year, kindergarten classes must carve out 30 minutes a month for sex-education classes, and the local CBS affiliate reports that parents aren’t exactly thrilled:

CPS emphasizes that the sex-ed effort is aimed at protecting children from abuse:

CPS insists the curriculum will use language children understand and focus on topics like bullying, correct names for external body parts and the difference between appropriate and inappropriate touching.

“As you identify body parts, you talk about should you be touched here or not.,” said Stephanie Whyte, the CPS Chief Health Officer. “And if someone touches you, and it’s uncomfortable, you should tell a trusted adult.”

“I’m OK with it,” said parent Ayesha Ahmad. “I’d like to believe it’s not necessary, but I think our culture dictates you can’t start early enough.”

But that’s not quite all that will be taught in these classes. Besides anatomically-correct nomenclature and a heads-up on identifying abuse, kindergarteners will also get taught the prevailing values of the school system about family structures:

Students will also take a look at the different family structures that exist in today’s society.

“Whether that means there’s two moms at home, everyone’s home life is different, and we introduce the fact that we all have a diverse background, “ said Whyte

That’s a lesson some conservative organizations oppose.

This brings up at least two big issue. First, children of this age aren’t going to have the sophistication to process this kind of instruction and compare it to the value systems which families use in their own homes. That’s the kind of issue that mothers and fathers should address with their children when they reach the appropriate age, not for schools to dictate as soon as they get kids in their clutches. Furthermore, when parents conflict with the teachers on this point, that will undermine the authority and credibility of the teachers, at the most formative age possible. There simply isn’t a need to address this at the kindergarten stage.

The number of Chicago Public Schools students that met state standards on the Illinois Standards Achievement Test plummeted this year because officials raised the bar for what it takes to pass.

Only 52.5 percent of 3rd through 8thgraders met or exceeded reading and math standards — nearly a 22 point drop from last year. But officials said the new test scores are a more accurate portrait of the performance of the city’s public school students and noted that 65 percent of schools actually showed progress.

Since the state decided in January to raise the cutoff scores for the Illinois Standards Achievement Test to get schools ready for the more rigorous Common Core curriculum, districts have been warning parents not to be shocked by the expected drop in test scores. Chicago is the first district in Illinois to release its scores, showing the steepness of that drop. The Illinois State Board of Education is expected to release statewide test data in October.

At CPS, the number of students meeting or exceeding state standards went down from 74.2 percent last year to 52.5 percent this year.

CPS told parents not to worry, because it didn’t mean that their children were performing any worse than they had been before, but just that they’d raised the testing bar to … expectations of grade-level performance. That’s more of an indictment of the tests CPS used in the past, and its consistent level of incompetence. And this new effort is a good example of why only half of CPS students can perform at grade level — because school districts are more concerned with social norming than they are with actually educating children.

Schools should focus on education. Value formation is best left to the parents.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Comments

Why do conservatives oppose telling kindergarten the fact that some households have two moms and two dads. Children normally take this news with about as much interest as the news that the sky is blue. What do conservatives think happens to a kindergartner who is taught that. Truly, I am curious.

libfreeordie on August 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Yeah, they’re just going to almost off-handedly mention that some families have two mommies and some have two daddies. There wont be a whiff of moralizing about it being equal to straight marriages. It will just be neutral information offered up in a neutral way.

No – just like everything else the left does in the name of “tolerance” and “information” it comes with a heavy dose of decrying conservative values and any deviation from liberal dogma as hateful. And you know this.

Also, will these kids also be told about polygamy? Or that in some families mommy has decided that your brothers and sisters should all have different daddies?

Yawn. I’ll take the social “conservative” indignation at this seriously when they demonstrate a serious opposition to socialized education in general and not merely the existing institutions being used to teach something that conflicts with their moral values. I shed no tears for the parents who are complaining that this is going to make it harder for them to raise the next generation of homophobes. Public education is and always has been a deal with the devil and when you make that deal, you don’t get to set the terms.

It’s apparent that you need a refresher course on the difference between “facts” and “opinions”.

Really? Why do you disagree with physiology? The anus is not designed to handle anal sex. Yes hetero’s and homo’s participate in anal sex but that doesn’t change the underlying science or make it normal.

chemman on August 30, 2013 at 3:57 PM

Again with the “normal” nonsense.

I assume by your statement that only hetero sex, missionary style, and with the intent of conceiving a child, is “normal” and everything else is not normal.

U.S. Department of Education: 79% of Chicago 8th Graders NOT Proficient in Reading

U.S. Department of Education: 80% of Chicago 8th Graders NOT Grade-Level Proficient In Mathematics

But, let’s focus on the important things like teaching 5 year-olds about sex!

Resist We Much on August 30, 2013 at 4:06 PM

Most liberals place a much higher priority on “students” being indoctrinated into liberalism than actually being educated to be productive and capable citizens. It’s long been evident and undeniable that teachers unions do great harm to actual education but they have unwavering support from liberals because they are down with the social justice struggle. Social justice is more important than an education.

One in seven Chicagoans age 19 to 24 are dropouts and the costs to the city and state are staggering, according to ‘High School Dropouts in Chicago and Illinois: The Growing Labor Market, Income, Civic, Social and Fiscal Costs of Dropping Out of High School’ by Northwestern University.

But, but, but teaching ‘Social Justice, All Day, All of the Time!’ will ensure Chicagoland PS students don’t end up being replaced by automatons at Mickey D’s!!! Just wait!

Indoctrination into left-wing ideology is THE TOP priority of Democrats.

The second priority is blaming it on Republicans when their lives turn to garbage.

Example: Chicago, NYC, and DC schools are completely run by Democrats and their students can barely read, let alone understand complex subjects. The Democrats then blame that failure on the Tea Party and Republicans and racism by whites.

Jetboy when it comes right down to it you’re really just another b*tch who cannot handle the truth. No 90% of Americans are not gay. So quit dreaming. You been blessed with a sexuality that has put you to the point that you will swallow another man’s semen and participate in male on male anal sex. Must be pretty sad.

“Teacher !! Teacher !! Johnny says his mom & dad don’t believe two ladies or two guys should have sex together !!”

“Thank you, Janey ! That’s very good information. We’ll be sure to have a talking-to with those people, as soon as possible !!
Johnny, please be sure your parents get this note, and call me right away”

Public education is theft by definition. But socons only have a problem with it when it’s being used to teach things that go against their moral values. They’d love nothing more than to go back to the times when public school students were mandatorily indoctrinated into Christianity.

On the agenda was a meeting with former President Zelaya, a Chavez wannabe, who the Obama Administration quickly announced had been illegally removed from office in a coup orchestrated by the Constitution, which only permitted one term, the legislature, the Supreme Court and the military, and other ‘legends,’ who are ‘¡Uptwinkles with the Revolución!’

A coup in Egypt?

‘We have determined that we don’t need to make a determination.’

- The State Department

Hondurans telling El Presidente that he can walk out on two or be carried out by 6 if he refuses to abide by the constitution?

Why do conservatives oppose telling kindergarten the fact that some households have two moms and two dads. Children normally take this news with about as much interest as the news that the sky is blue. What do conservatives think happens to a kindergartner who is taught that. Truly, I am curious.

libfreeordie on August 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Why would liberals scream bloody murder if public schools taught in sex ed and social studies classes that not getting pregnant outside of marriage and having a mommy and a daddy who are married are the primary indicators of being successful in life?

Public education is theft by definition. But socons only have a problem with it when it’s being used to teach things that go against their moral values. They’d love nothing more than to go back to the times when public school students were mandatorily indoctrinated into Christianity.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:30 PM

What is a socon?

Most Conservatives want their children out of public education. Why should we be forced into something we don’t want for our children? You certainly wouldn’t allow teaching abstinence to children.

Tell us all why your way for our children is better than what we wish to provide for them?

I shed no tears for the parents who are complaining that this is going to make it harder for them to raise the next generation of homophobes. Public education is and always has been a deal with the devil and when you make that deal, you don’t get to set the terms.

Most Conservatives want their children out of public education. Why should we be forced into something we don’t want for our children? You certainly wouldn’t allow teaching abstinence to children.

Tell us all why your way for our children is better than what we wish to provide for them?

Liam on August 30, 2013 at 4:33 PM

You can do whatever the hell you want with your kids. Public education isn’t going anywhere. That ship has sailed. My way would be to abolish public education entirely. If you want it, pay for it yourself. I shouldn’t have to pay to educate someone else’s kids, and they shouldn’t have to pay to educate mine.

You can do whatever the hell you want with your kids. Public education isn’t going anywhere. That ship has sailed. My way would be to abolish public education entirely. If you want it, pay for it yourself. I shouldn’t have to pay to educate someone else’s kids, and they shouldn’t have to pay to educate mine.

Well considering that Cons for years have pushed for school choice I’d say Armin’s argument is pretty weak — though he will fall back on the weak argument about theft or something.

CW on August 30, 2013 at 4:39 PM

“School choice” being defined as the government handing out free vouchers for private schools. Why should my tax dollars pay for that instead of public education? Why is the free market good enough for healthcare but not good enough for education?

What is an arch conservative? you seem to know better than me. I’d much like you telling me so I can better grasp where I stand.

Liam on August 30, 2013 at 4:41 PM

No kidding I’m paying to educate other people’s kids. That is the crux of the problem with public education, not the fact that it’s being used to teach kids things that socons find morally objectionable. And I’ve never used the phrase “arch conservative” so I don’t know why you’re asking me to define terms that you’ve made up.

You can do whatever the hell you want with your kids. Public education isn’t going anywhere. That ship has sailed. My way would be to abolish public education entirely. If you want it, pay for it yourself. I shouldn’t have to pay to educate someone else’s kids, and they shouldn’t have to pay to educate mine.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:39 PM

So that ship has sailed but you’re belly aching that socons or other conservatives aren’t making substantial efforts to end public schools?

“School choice” being defined as the government handing out free vouchers for private schools. Why should my tax dollars pay for that instead of public education? Why is the free market good enough for healthcare but not good enough for education?

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:43 PM

Let’s look back at your posts…

First you oppose public education, yet now you oppose vouchers for parental choices that are outside public education.

No kidding I’m paying to educate other people’s kids. That is the crux of the problem with public education, not the fact that it’s being used to teach kids things that socons find morally objectionable. And I’ve never used the phrase “arch conservative” so I don’t know why you’re asking me to define terms that you’ve made up.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM

So you’re more upset at having to pay for education generally than education being used as factories to create more social justice liberals?

You’ve already admitted that the former is never going to change so you expect people to give up on the latter one too?

So that ship has sailed but you’re belly aching that socons or other conservatives aren’t making substantial efforts to end public schools?

gwelf on August 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM

The word I used was opposition, not effort. As in, they’re not even capable of understanding the real problem with public education, even in an abstract way. I constantly see them getting wistful for the days when it was their moral values that children were being indoctrinated with in public schools.

No kidding I’m paying to educate other people’s kids. That is the crux of the problem with public education, not the fact that it’s being used to teach kids things that socons find morally objectionable. And I’ve never used the phrase “arch conservative” so I don’t know why you’re asking me to define terms that you’ve made up.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:45 PM

What is a socon? You keep tossing about the term but you won’t define it though I keep asking.

“Arch conservative” is a term from the 80s. So you and many others hold so many ‘flavors’ of Conservatives for so long, I’m asking for your Baskin-Robbins menu of political persuasion.

First you oppose public education, yet now you oppose vouchers for parental choices that are outside public education.

Your posts are there for all to see.

.. and? Do you want to finish this thought here, or explain what’s inconsistent about my position? Because it’s clear as day to anyone who can read and understand plain English. I am opposed to the government paying for things (in this specific case, education) with stolen money. Why would I find it any less problematic for the government to use stolen money to hand out “vouchers” for “private” (not really private if it’s being subsidized) education rather than just directly funding public schools?

What is an ultra conservative as opposed to an arch conservative?

Liam on August 30, 2013 at 4:46 PM

I will again ask you why you’re asking me to define meaningless terms that you apparently made up yourself or picked up from some source other than my posts.

Is there a single person here who doesn’t understand what a socon is? I am not interested in playing a game of semantics with you, and I have no idea what you hope to accomplish by attempting to drag the conversation off into some completely irrelevant topic like this.

Is there a single person here who doesn’t understand what a socon is? I am not interested in playing a game of semantics with you, and I have no idea what you hope to accomplish by attempting to drag the conversation off into some completely irrelevant topic like this.

Schools should focus on education. Value formation is best left to the parents.

I’m afraid you’re a little late to THIS dance, Mr. Morrissey. There is no redeeming the American educational system. Even an agnostic neuroscientist like Joseph Chilton Pearce (The Magical Child) thinks it needs to be completely dismantled and rebuilt from the ground up.

The word I used was opposition, not effort. As in, they’re not even capable of understanding the real problem with public education, even in an abstract way. I constantly see them getting wistful for the days when it was their moral values that children were being indoctrinated with in public schools.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:50 PM

And so what you really want is socons to acknowledge something in their perspective that you admit will never come to pass? These are the things you like to complain about?

And you appear completely unaware that socons are behind large swaths of the homeschooling movement? So many socons are opting out of the public education system.

I’m open to the idea of drastically reducing public schooling or even eliminating it but I agree that this is never going to happen. And you seem to have a very odd notion of conservatism. It’s not just socons but conservatives in general who leave room in their philosophy for public schools. Fiscal cons don’t complain about public schools from the libertarian angle (e.g., that people shouldn’t be forced to pay for it at all) but that entrenched unions make it far too expensive and ineffective.

Also, the moral values that used to be taught in schools prepared people to be successful for life. You seem to have some weird notion of how “Christianized” schools were – whatever that means.

Is there a single person here who doesn’t understand what a socon is? I am not interested in playing a game of semantics with you, and I have no idea what you hope to accomplish by attempting to drag the conversation off into some completely irrelevant topic like this.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 4:58 PM

Irrelevant? You are the one who came into a post about sex ed in kindergarten and are screaming about “SOCONS!1!11!!!1!1″.

Can anyone name a person who is at or under, say, forty years of age and is a product of the Chicago Public School system and has achieved anything of merit in the intellectual or arts realm? Anyone? Anything? We must be talking about a few million people, right?

I’m open to the idea of drastically reducing public schooling or even eliminating it but I agree that this is never going to happen. And you seem to have a very odd notion of conservatism. It’s not just socons but conservatives in general who leave room in their philosophy for public schools.

But it’s specifically the socons who are raising a stink about stuff like this. As usual, it really comes down to hypocrisy: using taxpayer dollars to indoctrinate children is fine by them, as long as it’s their moral values and beliefs. (My favorite example of this continues to be school prayer, which seems to be universally endorsed by socons.)

Also, the moral values that used to be taught in schools prepared people to be successful for life. You seem to have some weird notion of how “Christianized” schools were – whatever that means.

gwelf on August 30, 2013 at 5:02 PM

It’s funny how indoctrination works, isn’t it? It’s self-perpetuating. Schools teach “values”, those “values” are internalized by the students, and when they grow up and become the next generation of citizens, they use rigid adherence to those “values” as the entrance fee into mainstream society. There was a time when being “successful” in life meant conforming to “traditional” Christian moral and religious beliefs. Someday soon, if not already, being “successful” in life is going to mean conforming to a different set of moral beliefs. And why should I care? It’s just trading one set of idiotic, irrational social norms for another, and either way I’m going to have to pay for it whether I like it or not. That is my problem.

It’s funny how indoctrination works, isn’t it? It’s self-perpetuating. Schools teach “values”, those “values” are internalized by the students, and when they grow up and become the next generation of citizens, they use rigid adherence to those “values” as the entrance fee into mainstream society. There was a time when being “successful” in life meant conforming to “traditional” Christian moral and religious beliefs. Someday soon, if not already, being “successful” in life is going to mean conforming to a different set of moral beliefs. And why should I care? It’s just trading one set of idiotic, irrational social norms for another, and either way I’m going to have to pay for it whether I like it or not. That is my problem.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 5:20 PM

So you have an understanding of history that leaves a lot to be desired.

You want to pick out school prayer but that’s not at all what I was talking about. And you also summon the strawman of some ambiguous and arcane and arbitrary definition of what it means to be successful that you claim I was using.

Bourgeois values – which parallel Christian values for the most part – do in fact lead to a successful life and a successful society. The “protestant work ethic” has long credibly been linked to America’s success. It is undeniable if you know anything about social science that if you are religious, get and stay married and work hard then you will be part of a cohort that is happier, more productive and economically independent. These things cannot be credibly denied – even libertarian Charles Murray who is no socon – strongly makes this claim.

Any sex education for Kindergarteners is inappropriate. Families who are in “alternative relationships” are free to raise their children and use the vocabulary they want to choose, but this should not be forced on anyone else.

But the bigger issue is the whole can of worms “gay marriage” has opened up (and a big reason why I do not support it). No longer will children be raised with the concept that men and women marry and have children – the basic family unit for thousands of years of civilization. Nope, now they will be told all sorts of confusing stuff – with words common to our vocabulary henceforth deemed prejudicial and hateful: Father, mother, bride, groom. Banned and erased from memory! And if little Billy tells little Freddie he wants to marry him, Freddie better not react negatively less he be branded a homophobe. Should Freddie confess to Suzie that he has romantic feeling for her, he risks being taunted for his bourgeois heteronormative dullness. This is all as Karl Marx planned, and its fitting that Chicago, where the Communist Party USA was founded, is in the vanguard of the long sought revolution and destruction of the family.

They do not; they are both well past the age limit that I set. Further, if you are suggesting any intellectual or artistic accomplishment on the part of those two men … well, the Vargas drawings were nice way back when, but I pity the fool that is a fan of Hugh or Lawrence.

So you have an understanding of history that leaves a lot to be desired.

You want to pick out school prayer but that’s not at all what I was talking about. And you also summon the strawman of some ambiguous and arcane and arbitrary definition of what it means to be successful that you claim I was using.

Bourgeois values – which parallel Christian values for the most part – do in fact lead to a successful life and a successful society. The “protestant work ethic” has long credibly been linked to America’s success. It is undeniable if you know anything about social science that if you are religious, get and stay married and work hard then you will be part of a cohort that is happier, more productive and economically independent. These things cannot be credibly denied – even libertarian Charles Murray who is no socon – strongly makes this claim.

gwelf on August 30, 2013 at 5:39 PM

Since you place so much stock in social science, I trust you’ll drop any remaining misgivings you have about schools indoctrinating children into social justice progressivism when the studies start to come out showing how believing in and practicing it makes for happier, healthier, more productive citizens. Out: protestant work ethic. In: progressive work ethic.

Why do conservatives oppose telling kindergarten the fact that some households have two moms and two dads. Children normally take this news with about as much interest as the news that the sky is blue. What do conservatives think happens to a kindergartner who is taught that. Truly, I am curious.

libfreeordie on August 30, 2013 at 3:22 PM

Why do you ignore the words “some conservative organizations” in the post you are replying to? You do so by profiling/stereotyping the entire persuasion.

Maybe you know or trust better than me, but I don’t see things getting better long as liberals have sway.

Liam on August 30, 2013 at 4:08 PM

It will get better. It might take many generations and some hell on earth but the right ideas will win out.

The revisionists claim that a paradise of enlightenment is on the horizon.

The marxist-libertine-freesex-Nambla types can not ,at the same time, blame the SocialConservatives for the …crap this country is becoming <-factchecked+ … and claim Socons are a dwindling crackpot minority.

When the world that the Enlightened Ones mold turns out to be an ugly fragile mess then(not than h/t Christien) the next generation will rebel and hopefully look back at history with clear eyes and not clouded by infantile marxist noodle speak.

They do not; they are both well past the age limit that I set. Further, if you are suggesting any intellectual or artistic accomplishment on the part of those two men … well, the Vargas drawings were nice way back when, but I pity the fool that is a fan of Hugh or Lawrence.

Oh SEX for kindergarteners. Phew,that was close. I thought for a moment the banned three letter word they were going to talk about in kindergarten was GOD, at which point America would have revolted….can’t have young minds contaminated with goodness and truth when you can feed them perversion and Miley Cyrus advice.

Since you place so much stock in social science, I trust you’ll drop any remaining misgivings you have about schools indoctrinating children into social justice progressivism when the studies start to come out showing how believing in and practicing it makes for happier, healthier, more productive citizens. Out: protestant work ethic. In: progressive work ethic.

Armin Tamzarian on August 30, 2013 at 5:45 PM

I don’t place complete trust in social science…

But it already has weighed in on the progressive social justice “work ethic” and it’s an abysmal failure. Which is why liberal social scientists and other progressives emphasize the value of “social justice” over more traditional measures of success like economic independence and feelings of happiness.

Your comment is mostly a dodge from the factual statement that Bourgeois/Christian values do actually improve peoples lives.